Approaches to treatments of chronic migraine associated with medication overuse: a comparison between different intensity regimens

Mapping Assessments Instruments for Headache Disorders against the ICF Biopsychosocial Model of Health and Disability

Headache disorders have a strong impact on sufferers’ lives. However, the “content” of assessment instruments addressing concepts, such as disability and quality of life (QoL), has not comprehensively been addressed. We searched SCOPUS for research papers in which outcome measures were used in adult populations of patients with migraine, tension-type headache (TTH), and cluster headache (CH). The content of single instruments was then mapped against the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. A total of 150 papers and 26 instruments were included: 15 addressed disability or impact, two addressed work-related difficulties, and nine addressed QoL. Few instruments were commonly used across the conditions and covered domains of functioning were impact on daily life activities, homework, school, and work-related tasks, leisure time, informal and family relations, pain, emotional difficulties, energy level, and impulse control. Most of the research is based on instruments that were developed for migraine, which is critical for CH, and the impact of headache disorders on work-related activities is poorly acknowledged. Further research is needed to expand the scope of headaches impact on daily life activities, and on environmental factors relevant to headache disorders to raise knowledge on the less represented areas, e.g., TTH impact.

World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0: An international systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review examines research and practical applications of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) as a basis for establishing specific criteria for evaluating relevant international scientific literature. The aims were to establish the extent of international dissemination and use of WHODAS 2.0 and analyze psychometric research on its various translations and adaptations. In particular, we wanted to highlight which psychometric features have been investigated, focusing on the factor structure, reliability, and validity of this instrument.

METHOD

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, we conducted a search for publications focused on "whodas" using the ProQuest, PubMed, and Google Scholar electronic databases.

RESULTS

We identified 810 studies from 94 countries published between 1999 and 2015. WHODAS 2.0 has been translated into 47 languages and dialects and used in 27 areas of research (40% in psychiatry).

CONCLUSIONS

The growing number of studies indicates increasing interest in the WHODAS 2.0 for assessing individual functioning and disability in different settings and individual health conditions. The WHODAS 2.0 shows strong correlations with several other measures of activity limitations; probably due to the fact that it shares the same disability latent variable with them. Implications for Rehabilitation WHODAS 2.0 seems to be a valid, reliable self-report instrument for the assessment of disability. The increasing interest in use of the WHODAS 2.0 extends to rehabilitation and life sciences rather than being limited to psychiatry. WHODAS 2.0 is suitable for assessing health status and disability in a variety of settings and populations. A critical issue for rehabilitation is that a single "minimal clinically important .difference" score for the WHODAS 2.0 has not yet been established.

Update of Inpatient Treatment for Refractory Chronic Daily Headache

Chronic daily headache (CDH) is a group of headache disorders, in which headaches occur daily or near-daily (>15 days per month) and last for more than 3 months. Important CDH subtypes include chronic migraine, chronic tension-type headache, hemicrania continua, and new daily persistent headache. Other headaches with shorter durations (<4 h/day) are usually not included in CDH. Common comorbidities of CDH are medication overuse headache and various psychiatric disorders, such as depression and anxiety. Indications of inpatient treatment for CDH patients include poor responses to outpatient management, need for detoxification for overuse of specific medications (particularly opioids and barbiturates), and severe psychiatric comorbidities. Inpatient treatment usually involves stopping acute pain, preventing future attacks, and detoxifying medication overuse if present. Multidisciplinary integrated care that includes medical staff from different disciplines (e.g., psychiatry, clinical psychology, and physical therapy) has been recommended. The outcomes of inpatient treatment are satisfactory in terms of decreasing headache intensity or frequency, withdrawal from medication overuse, reducing disability, and improving life quality, although long-term relapse is not uncommon. In conclusion, inpatient treatment may be useful for select patients with refractory CDH and should be incorporated in a holistic headache care program.